Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Miguel de Icaza Leaves Linux For Apple OS X

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Del_
    replied
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    About C++: Well last time I checked you needed to fumble around with header files (I still don't understand what those are for),
    Wikipedia is your friend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Header_file
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    there was not one IDE that has C++ + GUI builder the way C# has it.
    Check out Qt Designer and Qt Creator. This was done about four years ago, today you can target just about any OS under the sun with one code using Qt:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVvB9Yqsigw
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    Also I read a few times that compilers tend to 'optimize' your code which results in unexpected behaviour.
    You mean doing more exotic stuff than O2? Why would you even bother. With C++ you typically get excellent performance, there is often little to gain from exotic compiler switches.
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    Aaand last one: There seems to be no debugger that is as easy as VisualStudio's debugger (build-in in an IDE and easy to use)
    Try KDevelop, integrates gdb nicely. Of course, Qt Creator also integrates debugging, http://doc.qt.digia.com/qtcreator/cr...r-engines.html For the more tech-savvy, you always have Emacs that with the CEDET extension turns into a full-fledged IDE.

    Leave a comment:


  • brosis
    replied
    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    None for the "desktop", because there are tons of desktops and none are useable by default. Linus maintains the kernel and does a great job at that, nobody is complaining about the kernel. I don't see competing kernels and massive duplication of effort there.
    Excuse me, are you fucking retarded? How are Unity, KDE, Gnome3, XFCE, IceWM, Awesome, LXDE duplicating anything? They are completely different projects with complete different goals and views. And user-friendly are usable out of the box, developer friendly are expecting developer to customize them to their needs by reading documentation. Just shutup!

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Broken, desperate need for rewrite, dinosaur, who cares.
    Another proof that you are fucking retarded.
    There is difference between truck and train, no? Fucking yes. Different transport ways call for different paradigms.
    On modern hardware, the network transparent Xorg is inefficient, because no one has supermachine with 1000 thin graphical terminals at home anymore. These "features" are not used, but are required for graphical throughput, resulting in excessive complexity, loss of performance and degraded coding/debugging transparency.
    Xorg is in no freaking way is going to be abadoned or broken.
    The road map is either to finish Wayland and then implement Wayland over network or rewrite Xorg from scratch specifically to match needs of datacenters with multiple thin clients to "as needed" degree.

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Nobody is mixing Ubuntu with Linux. Yes it's their decision and they are a corporation with business needs and will surely maintain Mir in the future. In that case perhaps the Wayland devs should abandon their project and help make Mir a good solution.
    Ubuntu decided to write own display server. The only two reasons why Ubuntu got under crossfire is NOT because they duplicate anything. It is THEIR money and THEIR decision.
    They got criticized only because they have listed many Wayland shortcommings that are false statements because they actually do not know Wayland. That was cleared by them.
    Which resulted in another criticism vector, they rewrite simply because they want full control over it even though they have not been hindered to change and upstream anything they change, which is always seen as stupid thing to do.
    Are we clear now?

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    What's your argument here? You feel the year of Linux desktop was 2003 and that means I should crawl out of my hole? I don't get it. I started using Linux around 1997-1998 with Redhat 5.x and Slackware 3.x. The year of Linux desktop has never come, crawl out of your hole.
    If you did start in 1997, then you would not bullshit me with such claims! In 2003 Linux was enough powerfull with Nvidia graphics card and HP all-in-ones to do absolutely everything.
    That was the year of Linux desktop for me, because I booted into it and never booted back into windows since then. Never.

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Mostly they are. Ever worked at a software company?
    I know a frigging 80 year old salesman, COMPLETE NOOB when it comes to computers, who works in technical area who uses Linux for EVERYTHING. Is he nerd?

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Yes you do fail, because I have no idea where you are going with this.
    Oh shut up - what is "MVP"?

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    HAHAHAHAHAHA. Is my response to that. Try that going from Ubuntu, then to Fedora, then to SUSE will ya? Or even between versions of the same distro. Anyways, you quoted me and started talking about something completely different again.
    Fine, lets unroll the quote for the blind:
    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Originally posted by brosis View Post
    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    You need someone rational at the top to tell the nerds what they should code, not the other way around. I always laugh when I see people arguing that the Linux desktop is better than Windows/Mac, and has reached maturity. We all know these people spend hours setting up their desktop, installing binary drivers, desktop extensions, custom launcher docks, etc. and when they are finally done it looks kinda like a Mac except it's just a polished turd.
    You can transfer your ~ with you. So its one-time life-time setup.
    HAHAHAHAHAHA. Is my response to that. Try that going from Ubuntu, then to Fedora, then to SUSE will ya? Or even between versions of the same distro. Anyways, you quoted me and started talking about something completely different again.
    I havent and going from Ubuntu to Fedora to whatever will work FINE.
    I also were not talking about "something completely different". So suggestion - how about you shut up?

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Functioning binary package management? Spending less time downloading??? What planet do you live on? Seriously... Using Linux since 2003 didn't do you much good. Binary packages are not installable across different versions of the same distribution and certainly not between different distributions. Ever heard of Linux dependancy hell? We've been living in it since the start. Anyone running a modern Linux distribution have hundreds of meg's worth of updates weekly if not daily, even if the updates concern parts of the system that you will never even touch.
    Are you fucking retarded?! Binary packages work FINE across different versions of same or whatever distribution, because each distribution has own binary repository that no one ever cares about because its automatic.
    No, I haven't heard of Linux dependency hell, but I know about DLL hell and newer version WinSUCKS (WinSxS) which grows beyond 100GiB very rapidly due to each application being installed with own dynamic libraries in seperate containers.
    Also, you once more point out you should shut the fuck up because amount of updates one gets depends solely on software choice and distribution policy - whether its rapidly updating or not; whether its bleeding edge or stable.
    If you join microshaft developer channel, you winblows beta is updated no less frequent as for example, debian sid. But one difference again - one can PIN the packages and prevent any updates without breaking anything.

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Don't confuse Linux (awesome kernel) with random open source hackers hobby projects. Yes it offers tons of desktop environments and configuration possibilities. Too bad all of them are crap! Microsoft and Apple have fulltime employees doing research on UI design and usability and it shows. Instead of imitating them, keeping the best stuff and improving on the not so good stuff, GNOME and KDE devs think they can do better. Wrong!
    How fucking much have both MacOS and windows reinvented the wheel? What about microsoft bob?

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Exactly, because their default environment works great and they can focus on using the computer for it's real purpose instead of wasting their time on broken desktop environments. Users and devs should be forced, only then would we get progress. Obviously that ain't gonna happen because most "Desktop" devs work in their spare time and work on what they feel like. And if they feel taskbar is not working, it's gone. If they feel like spatial window mode is great (remember that?) then that's what we get.
    Oh fuck no, not because it works great - but because they have no choice but get used to it. And you are NOT forced, if you want stable software, use STABLE DISTRIBUTION. They have XFCE 4.6 right now in Debian Stable, very old, but completely stable.

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    Errrr. You're a double-turd then, how about that? Great discussing with you.
    Nope - a turd is matter that constantly spreads decaying odor regardless of environiment for no apparent reason except its own nature, it matches you perfectly.
    I am a turd cleaner and you are wiped once again.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    A user who sees no benefit from GPL is an ignorant user. GPL is all about the freedom for the user, not developers.
    No it is not, it is all about development. A user can install what ever he wishes and is not restricted by the license.

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    That is a matter of opinion and the typical "user" sees no benefit. The GPL is great for developers who wish to release their code to the public and force others to contribute back.
    A user who sees no benefit from GPL is an ignorant user. GPL is all about the freedom for the user, not developers.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by JS987 View Post
    GPL applications shouldn't be dual licensed as GPL is best license for users.
    That is a matter of opinion and the typical "user" sees no benefit. The GPL is great for developers who wish to release their code to the public and force others to contribute back.

    Leave a comment:


  • Detructor
    replied
    Vala.
    Did you ever program with Vala? It's a nightmare. The GTK binding alone is enough to drive me away from it. It's horrible. (that may or may not be because GTK actually *is* horrible, but if I want to display a small List with a few strings in it, I don't want to code 50 lines of code, I want to define it add some elements to it and be done with it.)

    And as I said previvously: Their documentation sucks.

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    Originally posted by zoomblab View Post
    If the 2-3 major distributors would sit down and agree on a standard application bundle format there would a lot less fragmentation in Linux. Packages and centralized repositories are alright for maintaining the system. However, applications should be easily distributed from anywhere and from anyone, just like MacOS or Windows. Ideally the user should be able to get applications from the application creators themselves, e.g. Firefox from Mozilla, Chrome from Google, MySQL from Oracle, etc. If I was a developer of a successful open source application, I'd like the user to get a cross distro binary directly from my site. It would be a win for both me and the user.
    Meanwhile, we have the Open Build Service.

    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    People hate on .NET, but its pretty much Java done right.
    No, that's D or Vala.

    Originally posted by arokh View Post
    If you can't learn from the best, and instead insist on your own broken ways then you will certainly not go anywhere.
    That's what I have been saying, too. They do learn a bit, apparently, as there is now a way to search the Start menu, but there still are no tabs in Windows Explorer and such.

    Leave a comment:


  • JS987
    replied
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    And you cannot put closed applications on the mainline linux repositories. It isn't that different. Also you can offer GPL software as long as it is dual licensed.
    Arch and possibly others have closed applications in official repositories
    https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?name=nvidia
    https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?name=flashplugin
    I can't change license of software created by others. GPL applications shouldn't be dual licensed as GPL is best license for users.
    There are 10 other limitations except disallowing of GPL only license.

    Leave a comment:


  • Detructor
    replied
    Originally posted by LinuxID10T View Post
    LOLWUT? From every modern benchmark I've ever seen Java gives C# butthurt in the speed department. I guess you don't like the massive amount of Java IDEs either. They are different, not inferior. To give you some credit though, I don't code in Java (C++ and lua all the way for me) but still, I think that criticism unnecessary and incorrect.
    Java? Faster than C#? Nice joke man. You'd need some very special cases where Java beats C#. I did my benchmarks and tests. Also Java GUIs just look ugly. And yes there are multiple Java IDEs and the best I found was NetBeans, which is kinda good but slow when loading bigger projects (they may have fixed that in the meantime). Also Java is owned by Oracle...and we're all seeing what's happening to MySQL. Java won't be around for long.

    it's quite cross platform(but not build-once run everywhere... neither is C#, Mono though
    well in that case, you didn't do a good job. I developed 4 in-house applications in C# that worked on Mono without even having Mono in mind for it. I'm also currently developing a rather big/complex program that'll be available for Linux (because I need it for myself, too), there may be driver related problems in the future but as of now I didn't encounter any problems.

    About C++: Well last time I checked you needed to fumble around with header files (I still don't understand what those are for), pointers and there was not one IDE that has C++ + GUI builder the way C# has it. Instead you needed to do manual binding and stuff you really shouldn't even think about. Also I read a few times that compilers tend to 'optimize' your code which results in unexpected behaviour. Aaand last one: There seems to be no debugger that is as easy as VisualStudio's debugger (build-in in an IDE and easy to use)

    Leave a comment:


  • t.s.
    replied
    Originally posted by peppercats View Post
    Shows what?
    Every person I've talked to about windows 8(actual normal people, not power-users or linux users) have called it a design disaster. When I bought my laptop, every negative review simply pointed to windows 8 being crap and unusable.

    I guess it shows that microsoft vastly overpays their UI team.
    Um.. What I know is a man named Sinofsky made that happen. Metro, I mean. Despite Protest everywhere. And well, That Sir Balmer take the bait.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X